Trump threatens to withdraw the US from NATO: does the president have the authority to pull the country out of the Alliance?

US President Donald Trump suggests that the US's break with NATO began the moment he first proposed taking control of Greenland, reports UNNOToday, the US accounts for 60% of its allies' defense spending, states Canada's National Observer.

"It all started, if you want to know the truth, with Greenland," Trump said at a press conference. "We want Greenland. They don't want to give it to us. And I said, 'Goodbye.'"

Trump's statements came on the eve of NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte's planned visit to the White House. The president sharply criticized several NATO member countries for refusing to assist the United States in the war with Iran, particularly for the decision of some countries to close their airspace or military bases to American troops.

On the subject: NATO allies refuse to help Trump in the Strait of Hormuz, which is controlled by Iran, as oil prices continue to rise.

"NATO is a paper tiger," Trump said, dismissing suggestions that the United States might abandon its de facto leadership role in the alliance. "Clearly, they didn't need us because they didn't help us at all."

But will Trump actually follow through on his threats to leave NATO? Experts say it's possible—in one form or another.

Aaron Ettinger, an associate professor of political science at Carleton University, believes that the threat of the US leaving NATO should be taken seriously.

"We can't just dismiss Trump's threats as 'TACO Tuesday,'" Ettinger said, referring to the popular "Trump Always Chickens Out" meme, which mocks the president's habit of making aggressive statements and then backing down or doing nothing.

"NATO depends on the United States, and this makes the threat of refusal - legal or actual - quite real."

According to the Alliance's latest annual report, published last week, the United States accounts for 60% of all allies' total nominal defense spending.

While it remains unclear how serious the president is about leaving, experts believe Trump has several ways to either pull the US out of NATO or undermine it from within.

How Trump might try to leave the Alliance

Oettinger, a US foreign policy expert, noted that withdrawal is legally possible. The procedure is explicitly laid out in the NATO Charter: any country can withdraw by giving one year's notice.

However, Trump would then have to face resistance from legislators and the judiciary, as well as the provisions of the US Constitution.

The President is bound by domestic US law, which for several years has provided that he cannot withdraw from NATO without consultation with Congress and the support of two-thirds of the Senate.

"This will create a serious fight that will likely go all the way to the Supreme Court," Ettinger said.

Legal hurdles in the US

The 2023 law limiting the president's authority to withdraw from the North Atlantic Alliance was sponsored by Rubio, then a senator from Florida. Rubio wrote at the time that "no U.S. president should be able to withdraw from NATO without Senate approval."

According to Ettinger, this law means that any attempt to secede will almost certainly lead to a Supreme Court case and years of legal wrangling. He noted that constitutional law will likely prevail in favor of this law, as it was supported by Congress.

At the same time, the US Supreme Court is composed predominantly of conservative judges who often rule in Trump's favor.

Exit is not the only option

Wendy Gilmore, a representative of the Conference of Defense Associations think tank, stated that the head of the White House has already proven his ability to destabilize the situation and, even without formally withdrawing from the treaty, could create serious problems for the Alliance.

"He is willing to use presidential decrees even when their legality is unclear," she noted, adding that Trump could reduce or completely end U.S. participation in various NATO initiatives.

“It is in the interests of the Alliance and the United States itself to soberly assess where our interests lie and find a way to deal with the global strategic instability that has arisen following the decision of the United States and Israel to attack Iran.”

University of Ottawa international relations professor Roland Paris suggested that Trump could deprive NATO of funding and other resources to such an extent that it would have an effect comparable to withdrawal.

"He could effectively withdraw the US from NATO even without a formal decision—simply by ending the participation of American armed forces in the Alliance's activities, including by recalling the Supreme Allied Commander, who is traditionally an American," Pari emphasized.

"This will provoke serious resistance in Congress. It has the authority to unilaterally reduce US participation in the Alliance. We haven't reached that point yet, but I wouldn't rule anything out."

Why is the White House issuing such criticism now?

Trump is not the only high-ranking American politician to question NATO's future.

US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth declined to confirm his commitment to the Alliance at a press conference on March 31.

"It's hard to talk about a full-fledged alliance if countries aren't willing to support you when needed," Hegseth concluded, adding that Trump "is only pointing that out."

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking on Fox News, said the administration "unfortunately has to reconsider" whether the Alliance is "doing its job" or becoming a "one-way street" where America must defend Europe while member countries are unwilling to come to the aid of the US.

Both cabinet members are unanimous in their opinion: Trump will make the final decision.

Spain, Italy and several other NATO countries have denied the American military the use of their air bases during the war against Iran.

The Spanish prime minister called the war illegal and unjust, while in Italy the use of air bases requires parliamentary approval.

You may be interested in: top New York news, stories of our immigrants, and helpful tips about life in the Big Apple - read it all on ForumDaily New York

Legal experts have expressed concern about potential violations of international law, citing the destruction of civilian infrastructure as a result of US airstrikes. Trump has threatened to bomb civilian targets, such as desalination plants producing drinking water, which could constitute a war crime.

Despite discussing the possibility of leaving NATO, Trump stopped short of harshly criticizing the alliance in his prime-time television speech on April 1, despite previously saying he would do so.

At the same time, he called on allies to use their armed forces to establish control over the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

Read also on ForumDaily:

Airlines are starting to cancel flights due to fuel shortages caused by the war with Iran.

The US is spending so much money on the war with Iran that the country has no money left for kindergartens and health care.

Poland has refused to hand over its Patriot air defense systems to the US for the war with Iran.

Do you want more important and interesting news about life in the USA and immigration to America? — support us donate! Also subscribe to our page Facebook. Select the “Priority in display” option and read us first. Also, don't forget to subscribe to our РєР ° РЅР ° Р »РІ Telegram  and Social media coordinator- there is a lot of interesting things there. And join thousands of readers ForumDaily New York — there you will find a lot of interesting and positive information about life in the metropolis.